A 1933 Gibson L-00 and a 2019 Waterloo WL-14x

Here is a stunning Gibson L-00. Along for the ride is a Waterloo WL-14x. Marcus Kitley and Johnny Bregar present a short comparison for your enjoyment. It ain't scientific, but it highlights the subtle differences between these two lovely guitars.

[@jimjosefson2308]

The involuntary “wow” at 6:23 says it all.

[@GIBKEL]

The Gibson just has more of everything. Even within the family L00, there is so much variation and practices through this short time of 12 years or so. They seem to have 3 or different periods in which the instruments have completely different characteristics. Same body, different hoods, 12 , 13 and 14 fret versions kerfed linings to a short use of solid linings and arch top neck attachment, and then truss rod/trussless-during metal shortage during war time. And a variety of thickness of tops and thickness of bridge plates. They did what everyone else’s did, maximize use of the material. Many of the early ones were 3 and 4 piece tops. I suspect that’s why the stained them bone black. Now this isn’t just for the LOO, LO,L1, L2 and a bunch of Nicks and Centruy models which all used Maple. You find some Nicks built of Brazilian Rosewood but those generally had a trapeze and floating bridge. But they hand a bridge plate so many have become pinned. It’s a bugger of a collection to seek out and a difference of almost a pound-their lightest would be just shy of 3 lbs to nearly 4 lbs of their heaviest builds. And then there are anomalies that always shows up.

[@Ledzepfan88]

I can see the waterloo being that perfect dip into mojo without the pricetag someone honing their chops and ragtime technique if the Gibson is a bit rich for their blood, not many mere mortals can afford such a masterpiece but it's definitely a lifelong ambition to strive for. Excellent playing!!

[@joefarmer7727]

I agrre with most comments. Gibson was just perfectly balanced. The Waterloo just a bit brittle on the top end. But wait.. It was just in the pick version.. And played with a plectrum still the Gibson is a bit harsh..
Both guitars shine fingerpicked..
Waterloo really nails it 95 %

[@842hendersons]

Both instruments sound fantastic! Especially love the rich, full sound of the Gibson - seems to have more depth and volume. But maybe the Waterloo would be a better balance with a singer...? Thanks for the entertainment! :-)

[@NewGrowth25]

Is the Gibson a re-issue or actually a 1933?

[@rzh3443]

The WLX might deliver a different opinion. Ladder bracing provides more mid range emphasis. Also, 80 plus years of the top “curing” makes a huge difference. Waterloo does not yet offer a thermo cured top, probably to keep prices down.

[@DB-rr1eo]

I like the Waterloo better.

[@Jobbi_Pobbi]

Amazing amazing amazing demo

[@DB-rr1eo]

a 1933 instrument against a brand new instrument isn't really fair. Yet the Waterloo did very well against it. So let's see what the Waterloo sounds like in 80 some years.

[@Richard_Lush]

I had a 36 L-00 you just can’t replicate the sound.

[@Ledzepfan88]

By the way what's the name of that first tune? I love that style, do you have tabs?

[@jessd1952]

Gibson is louder, better presence especially. I wonder how much the Waterloo will change in 90 years.

[@patricklafreniere6908]

The Gibson has more crisp